References

Aytac A, Yurdakul Y, Ikizuler C, Olga R, Saylam A. Inhalation of foreign bodies in children. J Thor Cardio Surg. 1977; 74:144-151
Lanning GE. Accidental aspiration of a cast crown during attempted delivery. J Indianna Dent Assoc. 1988; 12:169-170
Cameron SM, Whitlock WL, Tabor MS. Foreign body aspiration in dentistry: a review. J Am Dent Assoc. 1996; 127:1224-1228
Milton TM, Hearing SD, Ireland AJ. Ingested foreign bodies associated with orthodontic treatment: report of three cases and review of ingestion/aspiration incident management. Br Dent J. 2001; 190:592-596
Tamura N, Nakajima T, Matsumoto S, Ohyama T, Ohashi Y. Foreign bodies of dental origin in the air and food passage. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1986; 15:739-751
Limper AH, Prakash UB. Tracheobronchial foreign bodies in adults. Ann Intern Med. 1990; 112:604-609
Martinez RL, Cardona EF, Gallego LL. Protesis de ortodonica como cuwrpo extrano de esofago. Esofagotomia cervical. Revista Espanda de Oto-Neuro-Oftanologia Neuro Cinigia. 1975; 33:179-182
Nazif MM, Ready MA. Accidental swallowing of an orthodontic expansion appliance keys: a report of two cases. ASDC J Dent Child. 1983; 50:126-127
Hinkle FG. Ingested retainer: a case report. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987; 92:46-49
Parkhouse RC. Medical complications in orthodontics. Br J Orthod. 1991; 18:51-57
Lee BW. Case report – swallowed piece of archwire. Aust Dent J. 1992; 12:169-170
Absi EG, Buckley JG. The location and tracking of swallowed dental appliances: the role of radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1995; 24:139-142
Dibiase AT, Samuels RHA, Ozdiler E, Akcam MO, Turkkahraman H. Hazards of orthodontics appliances and the oropharynx. J Orthod. 2000; 27:295-301
Rohida NS, Bhad WA. Accidental ingestion of a fractured twin block appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 139:123-125
Zitzmann NU, Elsasser S, Fried R, Marinello CP. Foreign body ingestion and aspiration. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999; 88:657-560
Killingback N, Stephens CD. A little distal archery. Br J Orthod. 1988; 15:121-122
Jacobi R, Shillingburg HT. A method of preventing or swallowing or aspiration of cast restorations. J Prosth Dent. 1981; 46:642-645
Israel HA, Leban SG. Aspiration of an endodontic instrument. J Endod. 1984; 10:452-454
Scott AS, Dooley BF. Displaced post and core in the epiglottic vallecula. Gen Dent. 1978; 26:26-28
Heimlich HJ. A life saving manoeuver to prevent food-choking. J Am Med Assoc. 1975; 4:398-401
Webb W, McDaniel L, Jones L. Foreign bodies of the upper gastrointestinal tract: current management. South Med J. 1984; 77:1083-1088
Ghori A, Dorricott NJ, Sanders DSA. A lethal ectopic denture; an unusual case of sigmoid perforation due to unnoticed swallowed dental plate. J Roy Coll Surg Edinb. 1999; 44:203-206
Neuhauser W. Swallowing of a temporary bridge by a reclining patient being treated by a seated dentist. Quintessence Int. 1975; 10:9-10
Henderson CT, Engel J, Schlesinger P. Foreign body ingestion: Review and suggested guidelines for management. Endoscopy. 1987; 19:68-71
Gonzalez JG, Gonzalez RR, Patino JV CT findings in gastrointestinal perforation by ingested fish bones. J Comp Asst Tomo. 1988; 12:88-90
Brady PG, Johnson WF. Removal of foreign bodies: the flexible fiberoptic endoscope. South Med J. 1977; 70:702-704
Ament ME, Christie DL. Upper gastrointestinal fiberoptic endoscopy in pediatric patients. Gastroenter. 1977; 72:1244-1248
Mac Manus JE. Perforations of the intestine by ingested foreign bodies. Am J Surg. 1941; 53:393-402
Maleki M, Evans WE. Foreign-body perforation of the intestinal tract. Arch Surg. 1970; 101:475-477
Brady PG. Management of esophageal and gastric foreign bodies. Gastrointest Endosc. 1995; 42:622-625
Worthington P. Ingested foreign body associated with oral implant treatment: report of a case. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996; 11:679-681
Knowles JEA. Inhalation of dental plates – a hazard of radiolucent materials. J Laryng Otol. 1991; 105:681-682
MaCabe JF, Wilson HJ. A radio-opaque denture material. J Dent. 1976; 4:211-217
Adelman HC. Asphyxial deaths as a result of aspiration of dental appliances: a report of three cases. J Forens Dent. 1988; 33:389-395
Ong TK, Lancer JM, Brook IM. Inhalation of a denture fragment complicating facial trauma. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1988; 26:511-513
Barkmeier WW, Cooley RL, Abrams H. Prevention of swallowing or aspiration of foreign objects. J Am Dent Assoc. 1978; 97:473-476
Alexander RE, Delholm JJ. Rubber dam clamp ingestion, an operative risk: report of a case. J Am Dent Assoc. 1971; 82:1387-1389
Myers DR. A technique for attaching a safety ligature to a rubber dam clamp. Dent Assist. 1972; 41:24-25
Rosch W, Classen M. Fiberendoscopic foreign body removal from the upper gastrointestinal tract. Endoscopy. 1972; 4:193-194
Soergel KH, Hogan WJ, Solammedevi SV Therapeutic endoscopy. Hosp Prac. 1983; 18:81-92
Christie DL, Ament ME. Removal of foreign bodies from esophagus and stomach with flexible fiberoptic panendoscopes. Pediatrics. 1976; 57:931-934
Vemula NR, Madriaga J, Brand J Colonoscopic removal of a foreign body causing colocutaneous fistula. Gastrointest Endoscopy. 1982; 28:195-196

Accidental ingestion of orthodontic band loop

From Volume 6, Issue 2, April 2013 | Pages 54-57

Authors

Ashok Kumar Jena

Assistant Professor, Unit of Orthodontics, Oral Health Sciences Centre, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Sector-12, Chandigarh, UT, India

Articles by Ashok Kumar Jena

Satinder Pal Singh

Additional Professor, Unit of Orthodontics, Oral Health Sciences Centre, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Sector-12, Chandigarh, UT, India

Articles by Satinder Pal Singh

Ashok Utreja

Professor and Head, Unit of Orthodontics, Oral Health Sciences Centre, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Sector-12, Chandigarh, UT, India

Articles by Ashok Utreja

Raj Kumar Verma

Junior Resident, Unit of Orthodontics, Oral Health Sciences Centre, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Sector-12, Chandigarh, UT, India

Articles by Raj Kumar Verma

Abstract

Any object routinely placed into or removed from the oral cavity during dental or surgical procedures can be aspirated or swallowed. Handling of small instruments or appliances requires special care, particularly when the patient is supine or semi-supine. Prevention of such incidence by the mandatory use of precautions during all dental procedures is the best approach. This case report describes an accidental swallowing of a piece of orthodontic band material and its management, and up-to-date knowledge on prevention and management of foreign body ingestion.

Clinical Relevance: Many complications can arise during regular dental care procedures. Aspiration or ingestion of foreign bodies has the potential of resulting in acute medical and life-threatening emergencies as it can be a cause of accidental death. Also, in supine or semi-supine patients, the risk of aspiration or ingestion is increased. Readers should understand that aspiration or ingestion of foreign bodies is a significant medical emergency and should keep themselves updated on how to avoid and manage such an emergency.

Article

Aspiration or ingestion of whole or part of an orthodontic appliance occurs occasionally in orthodontics but needs to be considered as an emergency as it can be a cause of accidental death.1 Orthodontic components are mostly small and, in combination with saliva, handling can sometimes be difficult. With the current concept of dental care delivery that involves sit-down, four-handed dentistry, the patient is usually placed in a supine or semi-supine position to aid access to the oral cavity and to improve the comfort of the patient and clinician. In a supine position, there is the risk of a dropped object falling into the oropharynx and being swallowed or inhaled.2,3,4

The incidence of swallowing or aspiration of foreign bodies of dental origin varies considerably in the literature; however, the range varies from 3.6–27.7% of all foreign bodies and the incidence is higher among adults than among children.5 Limper and Prakash reported that the second most common cause of foreign body aspiration in the lungs was of dental origin.6 Swallowing of foreign bodies of orthodontic origin ranges from upper removable appliances,7 expansion appliance keys,8 lower spring retainers9 and fragments of upper removable appliances,10 to a piece of archwire,4,11 TPA during its removal,12 habit-breaking appliances, ie upper removable appliances fitted with only osenklammer type retainers,13 orthodontic brackets,4 sectional archwire with loop,4 and fractured twin block appliances.14 This case report describes the accidental swallowing of a piece of orthodontic band material and its subsequent management, together with recommendations to avoid such a consequence, and contemporary thinking on prevention and management of foreign body ingestion.

Case report

A 13-year-old female patient had a Class II division 1 malocclusion with a constricted maxillary arch. Rapid maxillary expansion (RME) with banded RME was planned as the initial treatment. Whilst preparing the band on the upper right first premolar, the band loop (Figure 1) slipped from the hand and passed into the pharynx. The oral cavity and pharynx were examined and the band material was not found. However, the patient had no respiratory difficulties. An anaesthetist and a gastro-enterologist were consulted as a matter of urgency and the patient and her parents were given an explanation of the situation. Also, a PA view radiograph of the chest was recorded. The radiograph revealed the presence of band material in the stomach (Figure 2). The patient was asked to eat bananas and to check the stools every day. The patient was reviewed the next day with a radiograph taken of the abdomen. The radiograph revealed the presence of band material in the small intestine (Figure 3). On the third day after the incident, again a radiograph of the abdomen revealed the presence of band material in the large intestine (Figure 4). On the fifth day, the radiograph of the abdomen confirmed the absence of band material in the abdomen (Figure 5) However, the band loop was neither seen nor retrieved from the stools. The patient remained asymptomatic during the observation period.

Figure 1. The sample of band loop.
Figure 2. PA view of the chest showing presence of the band in the stomach.
Figure 3. PA view of the abdomen showing presence of band material in the small intestine.
Figure 4. PA view of the abdomen showing presence of band material in the large intestine.
Figure 5. PA view of the abdomen showing absence of band material in the abdomen.

Discussion

Any episode of foreign body ingestion in any branch of dentistry has the potential to result in acute medical and life-threatening emergencies.3 Prevention of such an incident by the mandatory use of precautions during all dental procedures is the best approach.15 The orthodontist and general dentists must be able to recognize the signs and symptoms of any airway obstruction in case a dental object is lost into the oropharynx. If an object gets dropped into the mouth in a supine patient, the patient should not be allowed to sit up immediately and the head of the patient should be turned to one side to encourage the object to fall into the cheek and not into the oropharynx.3 Alternatively, the patient could be turned face down.16 This encourages an object in the oropharynx to return to the patient's oral cavity so that it can be recovered. Also, the patient should be asked to cough.17 The mouth and oropharynx should be examined and, if the object is visible, it should be removed either with forceps17 or with high-speed suction.18 Cameron et al advised that either forceps or high-speed suction should be available during all dental procedures.3 The most readily visible site for the entrapment of a foreign body that has become displaced in the oropharynx is the supratonsillar recess, followed by the epiglottic vallecula and the piriform recess.19 If the foreign body is found in these areas, the retrieval, identification and confirmation of that object should be followed immediately by reassurance of the patient.19 If the foreign body is not found, it should be assumed that it has either been swallowed or aspirated. If airway compromise is noticed, a Heimlich manoeuvre20 should be performed in an attempt to relieve the laryngeal obstruction. If the Heimlich manoeuvre fails, immediate medical emergency help must be summoned. If a patient's airway is not compromised, the patient should be informed that he or she has swallowed the foreign body.

The majority of the foreign bodies entering the oropharynx usually pass into the alimentary canal and pass in the stools without complication.21 There is, however, always a danger of perforation of the gut, which can have very serious consequences, including death.22 Only large objects and those with sharp edges are liable to become impacted in the oesophagus and, if this happens, it usually happens at the level of the fourth cervical vertebra.9 The inability to swallow, muscle inco-ordination, pain on swallowing, haematemesis and vomiting, etc are common symptoms of oesophageal obstruction. This can also lead to oesophageal perforation with secondary mediastinitis.4 Once the foreign body reaches the stomach, it has an 80–90% chance of passing through the gut without problems.9,21,22 The usual time taken for a foreign body to transverse the intestinal tract is 2–12 days.9 Radiographic monitoring of the progress is, however, very important. The management of patients who have swallowed foreign bodies relies on regular assessment and serial radiography. Radiographs not only allow the clinician to confirm the presence of a foreign body, but also help to assess its size, shape and position and to look for indications of intestinal perforation, such as pneumoperitoneum. During the episode, the patient can be advised to supplement his/her diet with a large amount of cellulose, which will aid passage of the object through the gut.12,23 In the present case, we advised the patient to eat more bananas as they contain a large quantity of fibre. Use of a high-bulk diet may be helpful, however, there is no scientific evidence of the benefit of any special diet to support such an object's passage. Purgatives should be avoided because they increase the peristaltic contraction and thus increase the chance of intestinal perforation.24 Induction of emesis should be avoided when the foreign body is present in the stomach as there is always a danger of aspiration.17 For radiolucent objects, ingestion of cotton wool pellets mixed with a small amount of barium sulphate suspension has been reported to form a radio-opaque bolus around the object, which allows it to be tracked through the gut radiographically.17

Less than 1% of ingested foreign bodies can cause a perforation,12,25 however, individual articles reported a 4.5%26 and 5.6%27 incidence of perforation. Sharp pointed objects are associated with a higher risk of perforation. Objects longer than 5 cm are unlikely to pass the duodenum. Areas of physiological or pathologic narrowing, such as the pylorus, the ligament of Treitz, the ileo-caecal valve, the rectosigmoid junction and the anus are potential sites of impaction.28,29,30 The commonest sites for perforation to occur are the ileo-caecal junction and appendiceal areas.28 Also, the risk of obstruction increases in patients with abnormal intestinal anatomy, such as strictures. The symptoms of abdominal perforation include abdominal pain, fever, nausea, vomiting and abdominal distension.22,25

Recommendations

There are many consequences of foreign body ingestion, thus all precautions should be considered to prevent the ingestion or aspiration of a foreign body in day-to-day dental practice. The general precautions include the following.

Identification of high risk patients

This includes patients with lack of sensation of the hard palate secondary to the use of dentures24 and patients with excessive gag reflex,31 as well as patients with difficult access sites secondary to anatomical restrictions, ie small oral cavity, short palate, macroglossia and a large neck. Inhalation of foreign bodies tends to occur more often in patients with impaired central nervous system functions, which can be influenced by medication with sedatives, tranquillizers, opiates or depressants. Thus it is always important to review the patient's medical history carefully during the initial appointment.

Use of a protective gauze pack

Oral gauze packs should be placed in the posterior areas of the mouth or distal to the area where small items are being manipulated. This helps prevent objects from being swallowed or aspirated.

Keep an upright patient position

Patients with exaggerated gag reflex may not tolerate the gauze packs and, when a gauze pack cannot be used, upright positioning of the patient is an important consideration. In a supine or semi-supine position, the patient's head can be turned to the right or left to allow dropped objects to fall to the floor of the mouth or to the buccal areas rather than directly into the oropharynx.

Keep high-speed suction ready

High-speed suction should be available during all dental procedures.3

Keep yourself up-to-date with procedures

It is necessary to keep up-to-date with CPR (cardio pulmonary resuscitation) as the recommendations do change.13

Precautions related to specific orthodontic treatment includes that all removable appliances must be suitably retentive and of an adequate size.32 All components of removable appliances should be smooth and rounded as far as possible.10,33 Hooked or C-clasps should be avoided, as these increase the risk of puncturing or irritating the lining of the alimentary canal and make retrieval difficult.9 The keys for turning fixed expansion appliances intra-orally should be attached to floss and any open contact on the handle of the key should be soldered to prevent the floss from slipping through the handle.8 The use of different coloured acrylic, rather than pink, for the construction of removable appliances and retainers has been suggested to avoid problems visualizing the acrylic on bronchoscopy or endoscopy if fragments are inhaled or swallowed.32,34,35 An alternative colour of acrylic to ‘pink’ and ‘clear’ can be used in orthodontic appliances.13 Patients should always be advised, both verbally and with written instructions, at the time of appliance placement that they should not try to re-insert damaged, ill-fitting or broken fragments of any appliance.10 The secure bonding of the brackets to the teeth must be confirmed. All archwires should be cinched down distal to any bonded attachment, and secured before intra-oral cutting. The use of a gauze dental napkin as a barrier technique should be placed behind the orthodontic appliance during its adjustment.36 While placing the molar bands, especially second molar bands, one must keep control of the bands and, to aid quick retrieval, floss can be tied through the tube in a figure of eight design. Once the band is cemented on the teeth, the floss can be removed.13 A similar technique is also recommended for the placement of rubber dam clamps.13,37,38 While fitting or removing transpalatal arches and quadhelices, it may be advisable to have a long length of floss tied to the appliance attached via a closed loop on the appliance to avoid its inhalation or swallowing.12 When cutting the ends of the archwire with safety distal end wire cutters, the pliers sometimes fail to retain the cut fragment. A cotton wool roll should be placed over the end of the archwire before it is cut to prevent the piece of archwire becoming displaced in the mouth, or embedded in the soft tissues of the patient or operator.16 All orthodontic instruments that are used intra-orally should be regularly inspected for signs of failure, and replaced or reconditioned on a regular basis.16 If a piece of appliance is dropped in the mouth during treatment, the availability of high-speed suction can help with quick retrieval.18

Guidelines for planning for endoscopic removal of foreign bodies

When managing a patient with foreign body ingestion, two important questions must be addressed:

  • Is the foreign body likely to cause perforation?
  • Can the object be safely removed endoscopically?
  • Factors which should be considered in addressing these questions include:

  • The nature of the foreign body;
  • The length of the object;
  • The elapsed time since ingestion; and
  • The patient's prior medical and surgical history.
  • Nature of foreign body

    If the foreign body is sharp, the chance of perforation increases by 15–35%.39 Sharp, pointed and elongated objects may fail to pass the fixed curves of the duodenum, and their ingestion may result in impaction or perforation. Early attempts should be made to remove them before the small intestine is reached.

    Length of objects

    There is no clear documentation in the literature regarding the length of a foreign body which is likely to cause perforation or obstruction. The removal of elongated objects longer than 10 cm (6 cm in children) should be planned for by endoscopic removal.15 However, Soergel et al40 recommended that all objects longer than 5 cm should be endoscopically removed as they are unlikely to pass the duodenum. Christie and Ament41 noted that circular objects greater than 5 cm in diameter can become impacted and cause mucosal erosion and, ultimately, perforation. They recommended endoscopic removal of the foreign body if the object remains in the stomach for more than 14 days.41

    Elapsed time since ingestion

    The length of time between ingestion and symptoms may vary from hours to months and, in unusual cases, to years. In most cases, when the object fails to pass through the stomach spontaneously after 3–4 weeks, reactive fibrinous exudates due to the foreign body's presence may cause adherence to the gastric mucosa.28

    Prior surgery or intestinal disease

    Prior abdominal surgery with anastomoses or adhesion formation could produce acute intestinal angulations and thus predispose to perforation or obstruction by foreign bodies.42

    Conclusion

    The management of patients who have swallowed foreign bodies relies on regular assessment and serial radiography. The patient should be evaluated for symptoms of intestinal perforation or obstruction. Provided that the patient is asymptomatic, a waiting policy can be adopted and the stools examined regularly for the presence of the foreign body. However, consultation with a gastro-enterologist is very important as endoscopic removal of the object may be a possibility.